Attorney General Eric Holder’s recent suggestion of a "racial animus" fueling Obama’s critics is no more than political posturing, said Wall Street Journal columnist Jason L. Riley.

Some GOP politicians and conservative media objected to Holder’s comments on ABC’s This Week on July 13, 2014. Riley, dubbed by Salon magazine as "the right’s favorite new race guru," dismissed Holder’s claims as fear-mongering a day later on Fox News’ The Kelly File.

"This is about Democrats concerned about minority turnout in November, and they have nothing to offer these constituents," Riley said. "It’s motivating them by scaring them, telling them that voter ID laws suppress the black vote, even though black voter turnout in 2012 exceeded the rate of white voter turnout, even in the states with the strictest voter ID laws."

The political and racial motivations and effects behind voter ID laws have been debated for quite some time. We wondered, how did voter ID laws impact voter turnout across the board?

The phantom poll booth

Riley told us he got the statistic from the U.S. Census Bureau. The federal data agency indicated in a 2013 report that the black voting rate (66.2 percent) indeed surpassed the white voting rate (64.1 percent) by 2.1 percentage points in the 2012 elections.

When Georgia became one of the first states in the nation to demand a photo ID at the ballot box, both sides served up dire predictions. Opponents labeled it a Jim Crow-era tactic that would suppress the minority vote. Supporters insisted it was needed to combat fraud that imperiled the integrity of the elections process.

But both claims were overblown, according to a review of by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution of statewide voting patterns in the five years since the law took effect.

Turnout among black and Hispanic voters increased from 2006 to 2010, dramatically outpacing population growth for those groups over the same period.

so much for the notion of voter suppression and this kind of puts the theory that voter Id laws are somehow racist to rest huh?

No, all it means is that this attempt to suppress the vote backfired. It had the unintentional consequence of causing the minorities to resist by coming out in larger numbers.
Not very good at this "logic thingy" are you? Don't worry, you're still a master at baiting.

No, it means minorities were determined not to be suppressed and they doubled down on turnout.

Originally Posted by Cicero

No, all it means is that this attempt to suppress the vote backfired. It had the unintentional consequence of causing the minorities to resist by coming out in larger numbers.
Not very good at this "logic thingy" are you? Don't worry, you're still a master at baiting.

Again sort of puts this voter suppression thingy to rest once and for all and I suppose now that we have seen the results why I bet Democrats will be working with Republicans to pass even more Voter identification laws now that it is shown to get the minority vote out.

Both of your links are broken and it turns out what you insist they say is not true. Or may have been true in 2012, but it wasn't in 2014.

On Tuesday, older, white voters — who traditionally support Republicans — went to the polls in droves, while turnout among traditionally Democratic groups — the young, the minoritized, and women — was down. Indeed, overall turnout declined to an estimated 36.6% of eligible voters, the lowest rate of participation since the 1940s, despite the $3 billion spent by candidates, political parties, and super PACs.

Yes, President Barack Obama’s poor performance and approval rating undoubtedly played a role in the lower turnout. But the evidence is piling up that systematic voter suppression, including voter ID laws and dubious vote-fraud prevention software, played a significant part in keeping people from casting ballots, as well.

Whether intended to suppress minority voting or not, the Republican led demand for voter ID laws was perceived to be racially motivated. Most notably by the lack of any statistical support that voter fraud at the polls existed beyond a handful of examples nationally. The perception of ill intent motivated minorities to register and vote.

A great example were the extraordinary lines at the polls in Florida. If those folks hadn't felt that they were being victimized by the Republicans, there is no way they would have stood in those lines for hours to vote. It was a statement of defiance. It's part of being American. Tell Americans that they can't see the "Interview" and they flock to a bad movie. Defiant!

Again sort of puts this voter suppression thingy to rest once and for all and I suppose now that we have seen the results why I bet Democrats will be working with Republicans to pass even more Voter identification laws now that it is shown to get the minority vote out.

Well, no it doesn't. Voter suppression, using the law, is still alive and well.
As I said before, you're not very good at this whole "logic thingy." Just because your bad laws didn't have the outcome desired, that doesn't negate why they were passed in the first place.